Loading...
PC 10-11-76 CITY OF CUPEKrINO, STATE OF CALIFOR."nA 10300 Torre Avenue~ Cupertino, California 95014 Telephone: 252-4505 PC-239 Page 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON OCTOBER 11, 1976, IN THE COUNCIL CHÞ.~BER, CITY HALL CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG Chairman Adams called the meeting to order at 7:34 PM with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Comm. present: Connn. absent: Staff present: Blaine, Koenitzer, Gatto (7:40), Woodward Chairman Adams None Director óf Planning and Development Sisk Assistant Planning-Director Cowan Assistant City Attorney Kilian Deputy Assistant City Attorney Foster Assistant City Engineer Whitten APPROVAL OF. MINUTES Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 27, 1976: Page 3, paragraph 4, line 2: Change "trial" to "trail". Page 4, last paragraph, line 3; Change "perspective" to "pro spec':' tivelt. Page 5, paragraph 5, line 2, after the word "piped", add "along the drive". Page 6, paragraph 7 should read: "Connn. Gatto said the whole site at once. . . .sell quickly the City The remainder of the paragraph is all right. . . to grad .. experience " Page 6, paragraph 8 should read: "Mr. Cowan. . .build the IÌ1ajcrit of the lot s himself on pads as proposed." Page 7, paragraph 3, second sentence should read: "She noted that trees sometimes .. .. . ..homeowner..11 Page 7, paragraph 4, the second sentence should read: "He favored . . . putting the houses on the ridge line but rather, off to one side. The property owners can still get the view they are paying for but the houses are not as conspicuous." The last sentence remains the same. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 7, paragraph 6, line 3, add after the word "yellow" "-colored plan displayed on the board", and continue the remainder of the sentence. Page 7, paragraph 8, line 2 change "grade," to "grade", and on the third line, remove the comma after the word "style" and replace with "and", Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to approve the Minutes of September 27, 1976, as corrected. Motion carried, 5-0 Minutes of Adjourned Regular Meeting of September 29, 1976: Page 3, paragraph 3, add "to the tract" after the word "granted" in the first line; delete the remainder of that sentence and replace with: "because they were granted a 25' setback in lieu of the 20' , street width." Page 4, paragraph 7, line 2, delete "they" and replace with "the developers" . Page 5, paragraph 2, line 5; delete (front portion) and replace with "along Mariani Avenue': Page 6, paragraph 5, line 2: delete (front) and replace with "Mar iani Avenue". Page 7, paragraph l, at the end of the motion, add: "Condition 29 that this use permit is restricted to the use of Any Mountain, Inc..H. Page 8, last paragraph on the page, line 3, after "Condition 16" add "deleting last sentence in 16 (a) and deleting (d) and (e)." and on line 4 of the same paragraph, add after the word "parking" 'ueas~red between all garage doors on front property lines and/or sidewalks; the southwesterly dwelling shall be shifted northerly to provide a minimum l,2' setback from the southerly boundary." Page 9, last paragraph, line 4: delete "complying" and replace with "compliance". Moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Blaine to approve the Minutes of September 29, 1976, as corrected. Motion carried, 4-0-1 Comm. Gatto abstained PC-239 Page 2 9/27/76 Minutes approved 9/29/76 Minutes approved PÇ-239 Page 3 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING POSTPONEMENTS; None. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS The Planning Director stated there was one written communication that referred to item 1 on this agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS; None. I PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. CITY OF CUPERTINO; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (l-GPA-76) to amend the land use element of the general plan. First Hearing. Chairman Adams announced that this public hearing would continue to 9 PM and at that time, if not completed, it will be continued to the next regular meeting. The reason for this statement was that the agenda was very long. The Assistant City Planning Director introduced the public hearing. The General Plan can only be amended 3 times per year; therefore, the City is putting the requests together and bringing them up 3 times per year rather than right after they are received. He called attention to the fact that Dorothy Varian's request to have a portion of her property rezoned from single family residential to public park was omitted from the staff report of October 6, 1976. In the Spring of 1977, the City is going to consolidate its General Plan elements. The Assistant Planning Director then reviewed the transparencies of: 1) F.oothill Blvd. and Stevens Canyon Road to the east, Alcalde to the north, and Santa Lucia to the west and southwest, on the Land Area map; and 2) The Land Use map. He stated that the staff recommends the duplexes in that area be placed in a conforming status, but that the undeveloped duplex lots revert to single-family residential lots. Chairman Adams asked for comments from the audience. Mr. David J. Pilling, 22370 Starling Drive, Los Altos, said he now owns one lot in this area with a 40-S0 year old building on it ,which is rented out as a duplex. If this were to be rezoned to single-family he would have no financial incentive to upgrade the property. In addition, he stated that Mr, Harley was all set to put duplexes on his 3 lots, adjacent to Mr. Pilling's property, but had personal problems which delayed fruition of this project. The'Assistant Planning Director said duplexes would not be permitted under the present General Plan. Mr. Pilling said that at the present time, there are very old shacks on the property that do nothing to improve the appearance of the street. He said he does have room for another home on his property. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-239 Page 4 Mrs. S. White, 10629 Merriman, asked if his property were zoned for duplexes, if this would be a guarantee there,will be new duplexes or if it would just increase the density of his run- down dwellings on the property. Mr. Pilling answered, through the Chair, that it is not his intent to put as many people as possible on his property. Mr. Joseph J. Bolton, 10684 Stevens Canyon Road, stated he owns 5 properties along Foothill Blvd., south of McClellan Road. He was in favor of retaining the duplex zoning in that area because he said there are not that many lots left so we are not talking I about that many more units than are already in the area. There ' would be perhaps 20 additional units. He believes the City would I be ahead financially and aesthetically if people were encouraged i to tear down some of those old houses and put in some nice, new 1 duplexes. I Mr. George P. Davis, 10620 Merriman Road, spoke out against the I duplex zoning in that area. He cited the excessive traffic on Foothill Blvd. and the problems with small~children crossing this! busy street to get to the store. If duplexes were put in, this I would double the number of &nall-child potential. Also, the water pressure is inadequate, and the sewer system backs up. He said II they are starting to have "brown-outs" because of inadequate electric power capacity. He prefers to have the area remain in its present condition. Comm. Gatto said he believes the staff report is consistent with previous discussions on this subject. Comm. Blaine agreed with Comm. Gatto. She said it is a shame the existing duplexes were allowed to go in there. Comm. Koenitzrr, Woodward, and Chairman Adams agreed. Land Area 2 ttansparency was displayed next. The Assistant Planning Director said there is a movement in this area around ! the intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Foothill Blvd. to develop within the confines of the General Plan recommendation of single-family units. After street dedications, this property would not qualify for duplexes. Consensus was 5-0 to accept staff recommendation for Land Area Ill. The Assistant City Attorney advised that if, for some reason, anybody is unhappy with a zoning decision made by the Planning Commission, they should be advised that the decision would end here, subject to petition to the City Council. This is in case the Planning Commission does not amend the General Plan. PC-239 Page 5 MINUTES OF OCTOBER ll, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Mr. Jason Chartier, 21060 Homestead Road, representing Mr. Murphy, who is requesting duplex zoning, said they are talking about a cluster-type Rl, not duplexes. He believes this is handled under the R2 zone. This is based on the commerical property on the corner and the sound wall buffer. Carom. Gatto said the property to which he is referring has a 4.4 density on it now. Carom. Koenitzer, Blaine designation is proper agreed. and Woodward agreed that the present Rl for this property. Chairman Adams also Consensus was 5-0 to accept staff recommendation for Land Area #2. The Assistant Planning Director identified Land Area #3 on the map. The current designation is recreational/agricultural land use. The staff recommended this property be used for residential with 0-4.4 density with the understanding that when the owner does something with the property that the City take a closer look at the topography. Comm. Koenitzer observed that it appears this property was graded for development at one time. Chairman Adams asked for comments from the audience. Mr. Casey Jones, Deep Cliffe Drive, said there was a road to the south that went to the horse ranch and the old mansion where De Anza Circle is now. The homes along Deep Cliffe Drive were designed to look out on the view. If homes were put on this property they will then look down at roofs or into second-story windows. Mr. Roy Mallard, 16728 Deep Cliffe Drive, said the road to the golf course runs along his property and is too noisy during the day. If homes are built in there it will also be noisy at night. If homes are built in there, he would like to have some restrictions on them. Mr. Mike Glasson, 22222 McClellan Road, said they have been operating Deep Cliffe Golf Course for about l5 years and they purchased this lot at the same time. They had been informed that they needed this land for access. They feel this property could be developed in keeping with the area. It could be restricted to one story. Comm. Koenitzer said that here we have a case of a property owner who wants to develop his property in conformance with the zoning and other property owners would like to have their view retained. Mr. Herman Glockler, 22360 McClellan Road, said he is the owner of a duplex on McClellan. He said he was informed that every one of the property owners along here are paying a surcharge because of the view and now he is faced with losing this view of the golf course. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNU¡G COMMISSION MEETING Comm. Gatto said his initial inclination would be to retain this as open space. The number of homes they could place on this property is rather limited. The slope provides a transition from the golf course to the homes above. The golf course may some day wish they had this land in order to increase the size of their parking lot. Comm. Koenitzer said the staff's recommendation for residential use is satisfactory with him. He said he sees no need to in- crease the size of the golf course parking lot because the course is limited as to the number of people who can use it at one time. ' Comm. Woodward said he had no strong feelings about why this should r~ain recreational property, although he is sympathetic with the people who live above this property. He said he would opt with 0-4.4 with an underlying recreational use for this property. Comm. Blaine said if it is not being used as agricultural and the potential was not there, she could see no reason why single : story homes with restrictions could not be placed on the property. She would like to see an underlying recreational/agricultural zone placed on the property. Chairman Adams concurred with this.' Moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer, to con- tinue l-GPA-76 to the next regular meeting. Motion carried, 5-0 Mrs. Dorothy Varian said she was present to speak to Land Area U7, and had input relevant to this public hearing. She said it would be extremely difficult for her to attend the October 25th meeting. After discussion, it was agreed Land Area U7 would be discussed at the beginning of the October 25th meeting, and she would be there. Chairman Adams called a recess at 9:l5 PM. The meeting recon- vened at 9:25 PM. PC- 239 Page 6 l-GPA-76 continued PC-239 Page 7 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 2. CITY OF CUPERTINO: Public Hearing to consider amendments to the North De Anza Blvd. Conceptual Plan, as follows: (1) To modify Condition 2 to delete reference to previously approved private conceptual zoning plans; (2) To consider pedestrian and bicycle access between the Garden Gate subdivision and Bandley Drive; (3) To consider an amendment to Appendix B related to landscaping guidelines; and other amendments as may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. First Hearing. The Assistant Planning Director gave to the Planning Commissioners a revised Condition 2 to replace the Condition 2 in the October 8, 1976 staff report. The Assistant Planning Director stated that Condition 22 of 2-Z-75 (Dr. Brown Plan) contains details regarding access to lots along De Anza Blvd. that do not have direct access to De Anza Blvd. The condition presented at this meeting should speak to the width and location of the driveways. Comm. Gatto said it was inappropriate to arbitrarily change overall plans which were partially completed, such as 2-Z-74 and 38-Z-74, without re- considering the entire plan. Since 2-Z-75 was not realized in any manner, the conceptual plan for Highway 9 could be used as a substitute. Mr. Arnold Fluckiger, 1150 Chestnut Street, Menlo Park, said he is the architect for the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Valley Green Drive and North De Anza Blvd. It is his contention there were no specific plans for that piece of property. Comm. Gatto wanted to remove only the reference to 2-Z-75 and to retain existing approvals on 2-Z-74 and 38-Z-74. The balance of the Commission were in favor of this approach. Moved by Carom. Gatto, seconded by Carom. Blaine to close the public hearing on this portion of the hearing Motion carried, 5-0 Condo 2 of 3-Z-75 modified Moved by Carom. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to recommend to the City Council that Condition 2 õf 3-Z-75 be modified todèlète "and 2-Z-75" and that Condition 9 be worded as to include the layout at this meeting. 2-Z-74 ârid 38-Z-74, once implemented, will take pre- cedence over this plan. Motion was amended by Carom. Gatto, seconded by Carom. Woodward, in the event of a conflict, conditions contained in the approved plans 2-Z-74 and 38-Z-74 shall take precedence. MINUTES OF OCTOBER ll, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-239 Page 8 Vote on the amendment: Motion carried. 5-0 , I Adams I i i AYES; NOES: Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman None Vote on the original motion: AYES: NOES: i Comm. Blaine. Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams None Motion carried, 5-0 (2) Bike access was discussed next, The Assistant Planning Director said the staff has restudied this area where Saratoga Foothills is going to be built and recommended the location for a bike and pedestrian access should go to the signalized inter- section of Mariani Avenue and De Anza Blvd. The question of future access should be continued until such time as a plan for land use is proposed. The concern is for access between one of these deadend streets to Bandley Drive. Comm. Gatto suggested a pedestrian/bicycle circulation between Greenleaf/Bandley/Mariani intersection may be provided by City dedication and improvement or by the property owner, whichever goes first. Chairman Adams asked for comments from the audience. Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Blaine to close the public hearing on 2 (b). Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Woodward to approve the following changes to the staff's recommended rewording to Plan Text and Conditions Relative to Pedestrian/Bicycle Access on Page 2 of the October 8, 1976, staff report: Beginning on line 8, it shall be changed to read: "Currently, there are two access points from Garden Gate to De Anza Boulevard-Alves Drive and Valley Green Drive. A pedestrian and bike path access route shall be developed . . . . . . . . . .future focal point for bus transit." The entire last paragraph shall be deleted. Ped/bike access approved AYES: NOES: Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams None Motion carried, 5-0 MINUTES OF OCTOBER ll, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-239 Page 9 Discussion next turned to (3) Appendix B, et al. The Planning Director asked the Planning Commission's opinion of grass or ground cover for the City's entrance from the north On De Anza Blvd. in light of the maintenance and vater conservation factors. The Assistant City Engineer reported that grass would cost about $1000 per acre per year more than ground cover, not including water. There are about 6 acres on both sides of De Anza Blvd. along this stretch. He answered the Commission that the total bill per acre is about $10,000 per acre, so we are talking about 10% more for grass. Comm. Woodward wanted to know what kind of ground cover would be put in and whether or not it would stand the trampling. The Assistant City Engineer said the City is in the process of forming an assessment district for the Sobrato-Berg improvements. Comm. Gatto asked if the property owners will install irrigation systems. The Planning Director said this has been discussed but not yet decided. Chairperson Sallan, of the Architectural and Site Approval Committee, reported the feelings of this Committee in regard to grass versus ground cover. The Committee said economics should be taken into consideration, but aesthetics must also be taken into consideration here. The Committee recommends grass rather than ground cover for this entrance to our City. Chairperson Sallan said the Committee wants clarification of the averaging concept for the buffer area and she asked that this be covered in the Guidelines. Chairman Adams asked for comments from the audience. Messrs. John Sobrato and John Berg wanted to present their side of the picture. Mr. Sobrato reminded the Commission that the land they were talking about is worth $125,000 per acre. The difference between turf and ground cover is insignificant, and they were in favor of grass. Dr. Joseph Brown said he is opposed tioned the wisdom of the meandering putting the sidewalk along the curb with maintenance, water, etc. to the lawn. sidewalk. He so there will He also ques- suggested be no problems PC~239 Page 10 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Architect Cliff Peterson, representing Any go along with either turf or ground cover. averaging is vital to their project. Mountain, said they could He stressed that the Comm. Gatto would like to grapple with the numbers. tinuing this item, vote on this, and then let the City Council Otherwise, he would be in favor of con- Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 The Planning Commission indicated a desire to keep the lawn as suggested by H-Control and had been previously approved in conceptual plan. Landscaping could be greater but only 35 ft. would be countable. Section 2.7.2 approved Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer, that the Planning Commission finds that Section 2.7.2 is consistent with the Planning Commission's thoughts on auxiliary streets Torre Avenue, Bandley Drive, Valley Green Drive, Lazaneo Drive, Alves Drive and Mariani Drive. AYES: NOES: Carom. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams None Motion carried, 5-0 Comm. Gatto commented that the other entrance to our City, Holfe Road, is grass and is very effective. 3. Application l5-U-76 of SARATOGA FOOTHILLS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: USE PERMIT to allow construction of 34 single-family residential homes in a planned development zone. Said proDerty is located westerly of and adjacent to Bandley Drive approximately 500 feet northerly of the intersection of Bandley Drive and Alves Drive. First hearing continued. The Assistant Planning Director reviewed the revised plan that was received by the staff late the afternoon of this meeting. The staff would like each residence to have a 20' driveway. The new plan reflects an attempt to provide a focal point from Bandley Drive into the pool and common open space. Mr. Jerry Lohr, 1745 Saratoga Avenue, San Jose, said they would like to fence around the perimeter of the open space and have open (perhaps wrought iron) gates with keys for the residents and their guests. They don't want to encourage the public to come into the common open space, There will be four 16' lengths of back fences across Bandley Avenue. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PC-239 Page 11 Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Corom. Woodward to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 Mr. Lohr answered Comm. Blaine that there is a 6' easement between the buildings to allow mutual access to the rear yards. The , front area and the common area are commonly owned and maintained., The home owners maintain only their private areas. Moved by Comm. Koenitzer. seconded by Comm. Woodward to recommend, to the City Council approval of application l5-U-76 with the 14 standard conditions and conditions 15 through 34 as presented in the staff report, and with Exhibit A second revision as presented at this meeting. Discussion followed. Comm. Woodward would like to delete Condition 19. The Assistant Planning Director said Condition l8 should also be deleted. The motion was amended by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Woodward to delete Conditions 18 and 19 and to include Condition 35 - that units 6 and 15 shall be flipped so they have separate driveways 20' long. Vote on the amendment: AYES: NOES: Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams None Motion carr ied. 5-0 Comm. Gatto said the use and density of this land are good, but the PD zone is to allow the developer to create something exciting. This development is going to have a rather harsh appearance. This is practically a solid wall around the peri- meter of the property with the common area in the center. He felt that we should start forcing the developers to do something more unique with a PD development. AYES: NOES; Comm. Blaine, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams Comm. Gatto Motion carried, 4-1 The applicant was informed this would come before the City Council on November 1, 1976. PC:-239 Page 12 l8-U-76 continued 23-TM-76 approved MINUTES OF OCTOBER ll, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 4. Application lS-cr-76 of ARNOLD FLUCKIGER: USE PERMIT to construct a mini warehouse facility in a planned development zone. Said property is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Valley Green Drive and North De Anza Blvd. First hearing cant inued . The Assistant Planning Director stated this proposal is inconsistent with the General Plan. Architect Arnold Fluckiger, ll50 Chestnut Street, Menlo Park, said he drew all the plans for this site. The only plans with a bank or commercial indicated were made in 1972. There was no 50' landscaped buffer on any of the elements. ~~. Fluckiger was advised the appropriate action would be for him to file for a rezoning application. Moved by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Blaine to continue application 18-U-76. Motion carried, 5-0 5. Application 23-Z-76 of CITY OF CUPERTINO: REZONING approximately 4.33 acres from RI-lO (Residential, single-family, 10,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit) to BA (Public Buildings) zone, or whatever zone may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. Said property is located at 10555 Mary Avenue. First Hearing. The Director of Planning and Development reviewed the October 7th staff report. The ERC determined an EIR would be required. The City is applying for a Federal grant to enlarge the Corporation Yard. The proposal at this meeting is to rezone this property consistent with the General Plan. The EIR will be ready on October 12th. Moved by Carom. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Blaine to close the public hear :ing . Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to approve application 23-TM-76 and to recommend it to the City Council. AYES: NOES: Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams None Motion carried, 5-0 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEErING PC-239 Page 13 6. Application 23-TM-76 of SOBRATO-BERG PROPERTIES: TENTATIVE MAP to divide the 8-acre existing site into three parcels. Said property is located in the West Valley Industrial Park at the northeast corner of the intersection of McClellan and Bubb Roads. First Hearing. Mr. Sobrato said their only objection is unlimited parking the parcels. It costs $20 to $25 per month to provide one space, and there is no economic way to justify this common parking lot. The common driveway is all right. The Planning Director agreed with Mr. Sobrato. among parking I , I I I I Mr. Karl Berg suggested a modification to Condition l6 by adding the words "on driveways" to the end of the third line. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 i Moved by Comm. Blaine, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer, to recommend i 23-TM-76 approval of application 23-TM-76, with Conditions 1-15 in the ¡approved staff report, Condition l6 with the words "and parking" on the I 3rd & 4th lines deleted, Conditions 17 and 18 in the staff report, and Condition 19 requiring the dedication of access roads to I McClellan Road to the City. I AYES: Comm. Blaine, Gatto, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adam!, NOES: None Motion carried, 3-0 ; 7. Application 8-V-76 of GEORGE KING AND JAMES BERRY: VARIANCE! request from Ordinance 002(q), Section 3.3 to permit re- quired parking to be located in the front setback area. I Said property is located northerly of and adjacent to Alpinei Drive opposite Oasis Court. First Hearing. I I The Assistant Planning Director said the staff feels the Ordinance will take care of this problem once it is approved by the City Council. The staff report says this matter should be continued in case the City Council does not agree with the proposed ordinance. PC-239 Page 14 8-V-76 continued rescinded 8-V-76 denied MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Mr, John Rintala, 10lOl Scenic Blvd., said he is the owner of this property. He felt that a variance here would solve the problems in this neighborhood. He said they can build on this property by redesign or by elimination of some of the landscaping. They would prefer not to wait any longer for City Council action on the ordinance. The variance request is to park in the 25' setback. The Assistant City Attorney repeated the conditions under which a variance can be granted. All three conditions must be met. The Planning Director said the City Council wants the Planning Commis- sion to talk about rear yard setbacks and privacy intrusion in the R3 Ordinance. Chairman Adams repeated the conditions under which the Planning Commission can grant a variance. Mr. Rintala said there is a l5' change in elevation between this property and the property to the rear. These are town house type units, and there is only a bedroom window in the second story. The neighbor's roofline is about on a level with the Rintala lot line. The Planning Director reviewed the recent Appleberry application that was denied at the City Council hearing. Comm. Blaine said she found it difficult to agree there are extra- ordinary circumstances here. Carom. Koenitzer agreed. He sees that one particular design won't fit on this lot without a variance. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Blaine to continue this application 8-V-76 to October 25, 1976. Motion carried, 5-0 When it became obvious that the applicant wanted a recommendation rather than a delay, the previous motion and second and the vote were rescinded. Moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 Moved by Comm. Woodward, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to recommend denial of application 8-V-76. AYES: NOES: Comm. Blaine, Koenitzer, Woodward, Chairman Adams Comm. Gatto. Motion carried, 4-1 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1976 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Comm. Gatto wanted tQe record to show that he felt the R3 Ordinance ?resent1y under consideration and its reason for consideration, constituted an extraordinary circumstance in this case. UNFINISHED BUSINESS; None. NEW BUSINESS 8. Discussion of ordinance for the abatement of public nuisances resulting from unsafe or dangerous buildings. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Koenitzer to continue the above-mentioned ordinance to October 25, 1976. Motion carried, 5-0 REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION: None. REPORT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR 9. Annual Review of Urban Service Area. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Woodward to continue the annual review of the Urban Service Area to the next regular meeting . Motion carried, 5-0 ADJOURNMENT Chairman Adams adjourned this meeting at 12:07 AM. APPROVED: ATTEST: Chairman PC-239 Page 15 Public Nuis. Ord. cont'd Urban Service Area Review continued